Want a new lens for my XSi: 17-55 2.8?

[*Jen*]

I'm hoping you guys can give me some good advice. I'm looking for a new "everyday" lens for my Canon that I can use for pictures of the pets, kids, around town, etc, but also be versatile enough to do some artistic shots when time permits. We're heading on a DCL trip next month to the Med, so I'd like to buy the lens fairly soon so I have time to play and fall in love. :)

I love my nifty fifty for the 1.8, and I like the range of the kit lens, so I was considering the Canon 17-55 f2.8 IS because it seemed like a good marriage of the two features. I also read up on the 16-35L f2.8, but it's a few hundred dollars more and doesn't have quite the versatility I'm searching for. I also tend to have a shaky hand, so I thought the IS would be helpful.

Does anyone have any suggestions on similar lenses I should consider? Different brands, etc? Anything at all? Any really bad things about the 17-55? I'd like to know now before I shell out the cash! :)

Thanks so much!

[photo_chick]

You might check out Tamron's 17-50 f/2.8 as well. There is a version with IS (Tamron calls it VC).

[Mosca]

I have the 17-55 and I absolutely love it. Sharp, with good color fidelity, and low perspective distortion. The only downside is a tendency to flare and ghost when shooting toward light; it's been an issue maybe twice in 3 years, but it's there. This is the lens that is on my camera 99% of the time; I only take it off for shooting sports with the telephotos (70-200 and 100-400). In its current use, I put it on my 7D the day I got that camera, 12/17/09, and it hasn't come off since.

Others have said it has a tendency to pick up dust; I haven't had that problem. An early complaint was premature failure of the IS; I haven't had that, either.

[*Jen*]

Wow, thanks for pointing that out! I hadn't even thought to look at another brand--and it's half the price. That's always appreciated! :)

[Mosca]

Jen, here's a site that reviews the Tamron lens, and compares it to the Canon (and Sigma). The review is of the non-IS version of the Sigma, factor in the benefits of the IS. the Tamron looks like good value to me.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Tamron-17-50mm-f-2.8-XR-Di-II-Lens-Review.aspx

Purchasers of this lens (Tamron) from Amazon also like it:

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B002LVUIXA/ref=pd_lpo_k2_dp_sr_2?pf_rd_p=486539851&pf_rd_s=lpo-top-stripe-1&pf_rd_t=201&pf_rd_i=B000EXR0SI&pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_r=055QQCGZPV2G2JKFKSXN

[*Jen*]

Wow, I feel so green! Thanks for the links.

Looks like my choices are the (new) Sigma or the Tamron--there's just no way I can justify spending nearly twice as much for the Canon! I'm not sure I like the idea of a reverse directional zoom ring that is part of the Tamron, so that may just push me to the new Sigma.

So...anyone have the new Sigma lens? :)

[dhertz]

Some good info here I'm in the same position as you, looking to upgrade my kit lens to a better one for everyday use.

[mom2rtk]

I went through this exact same decision process back in the spring for my Xsi.

I read all the reviews and posted a thread here on the DIS:

http://www.disboards.com/showthread.php?t=2455377&highlight=vc+not

Someone else asked the same question shortly after:

http://www.disboards.com/showthread.php?p=37322766#post37322766

The general consensus was that EVERYONE loved the Tamron non IS. Most liked it more than the Sigma. I too have fairly unsteady hands, and really wanted IS (or whatever a given manufacturer uses). The problem is that most felt the IS version lost some of the sharpness that the Tamron NON IS was famous for.

I decided to bite the bullet and go for the Canon. I didn't want to be second guessing myself a few months down the line. I am very happy with it. Would I have also been happy with the Tamron? Who knows. But I'm not second guessing myself. I love how sharp it is!

Good luck and be sure to post back what you do!

http://imgs.inkfrog.com/pix/mom2rtk/sunglasses.jpg

[AlbertZeroK]

Another vote here for the Canon 17-55 EFS f/2.8 IS - it is suppose to have the BEST IS of any Canon Lens (with the exception perhaps of the brand new 70-200 IS f/2.8 Mark II).

I LOVE mine, in fact, it's my goto lens and recently sold my 24-105 because I never touched it.

[bob100]

another vote for the Tamron 17-50 2.8 non-vc
but also look at the new Sigma 17-70 2.8

[Mosca]

Just to complicate things, let's not forget the Tokina 16-50. I've not used one, but I do have a Tokina 11-16 which is an excellent lens.